Celeron J3355 vs A4-5000
Aggregate performance score
A4-5000 outperforms Celeron J3355 by a small 9% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2469 | 2530 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Kabini (2013−2014) | Apollo Lake (2016) |
| Release date | 23 May 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 September 2016 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
| Current price | $248 | $55 (0.5x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FT3 | FCBGA1296 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-5000 and Celeron J3355. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, DDR3L-1600 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | FMA4 | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| PowerTune | - | no data |
| TrueAudio | - | no data |
| PowerNow | + | no data |
| PowerGating | + | no data |
| Out-of-band client management | - | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| SIPP | no data | - |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Launched |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| VT-i | no data | - |
| EPT | no data | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-5000 and Celeron J3355. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3, DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | 2 |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 8330 | Intel HD Graphics 500 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Enduro | + | no data |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | no data |
| UVD | + | no data |
| VCE | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 700 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | + | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A4-5000 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
| Vulkan | 1 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-5000 and Celeron J3355.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
A4-5000 outperforms Celeron J3355 by 9% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A4-5000 outperforms Celeron J3355 by 8% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Celeron J3355 outperforms A4-5000 by 68% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A4-5000 outperforms Celeron J3355 by 12% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
A4-5000 outperforms Celeron J3355 by 32% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Celeron J3355 outperforms A4-5000 by 44% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.84 | 0.77 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.67 | 0.75 |
| Recency | 23 May 2013 | 1 September 2016 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 10 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A4-5000 and Celeron J3355.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-5000 and Celeron J3355, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
